Featured Quote:"A believer may pass through much affliction, and yet secure very little blessing from it all. Abiding in Christ is the secret of securing all that the Father meant the chastisement to bring us." - Andrew Murray

ccrider wrote:Intense, why does it matter to you whether something is stated in private or not if you have nothing to hide? Perhaps the function of PM is for direct communication that implies a private conversation, but does that preclude transparancy on the part of the Christian? Are you mad because Waltern may have violated ediquette or because you yourself were exposed in anger??

Ediguette and decorum. Thats it.

Quote:

Quite simply this: Are you denying that you called Waltern a "Conceited Fop"?

Why deny what I said? Why do you even ask except for what I am able to read from you?

Quote:

If not then is this Christlikeness? Perhaps you need repentence as well. You said HIS 'attitude stinks' then your attitude had the gull to call him a conceited Fop (whatever that means).

I still mean it. Would it have been better to use the words of Jesus on such a one?

Quote:

I can see why PM would be a good venue for such name calling because as you well know it wouldn't much be tolerated on the open forum.

]

So why your question?

Quote:

I don't think it's an excuse for doublmindedness. It's a little juvenile, and hypocritical, to bite in private then wax a shine on your disposition in public. God sees the PM attitudes as well, even if they escape us here.

Indeed He does and more, like your heart right now.. There is no double mindedness in my remark I made to him in private . Why not address him as you are me for posting as he did? Where is his "Christlikeness" in returning evil for evil? Got a word for him "Bro"? Is this not a demonstration by you, in what double mindedness really is? Examine yourself before bringing correction to anyone else.

Again, I rest my case. . . . Ken

2009/5/28 8:21

Re:

Quote:

ginnyrose wrote:QUOTE:I find it difficult to understand that so few, who claim to know the Bible, realize that the divinity that was in the man Jesus that, by His obedience is now made available for their lives.

I still would appreciate an explanation of this statement..

ginnyrose

Based upon your understanding that I read from you, I find it difficult you have a problem with that. I would rather have expected an, "Amen"!

What does John 20.22 say to you?

Consider when you review that passage that that was the first administration of the Holy Ghost the man, Jesus, made after His Glorification.

2009/5/28 8:28

ginnyroseMember

Joined: 2004/7/7Posts: 7474Mississippi

Re:

As I understand this comment "realize that the divinity that was in the man Jesus that, by His obedience is now made available for their lives" it would imply we can be divine. To me this borders on the heretical. However, since the Holy Spirit resides within the Believer he works to transform us into the image of Christ so that in essence we become partakers of his image but not be the image itself. We are always in a mode of being transformed because we have to battle the old man: a guy that has to be crucified daily.

ginnyrose wrote:As I understand this comment "realize that the divinity that was in the man Jesus that, by His obedience is now made available for their lives" it would imply we can be divine. To me this borders on the heretical.

Why must it be so when we both know what the limitation is? So why argue over it?

"Indeed He does and more, like your heart right now.. There is no double mindedness in my remark I made to him in private . Why not address him as you are me for posting as he did?" Intense

How is there no doublemindedness in the namecalling in PM and not right here for all to see? You're not hiding anything right? Then just lay it all out here Intense. Name call here!!! When you name call in anger under an assumption of privacy but refrain from such behavior on the forum... that's doubleminded as far as I'm concerned.

You yourself called on Waltern to repent. Right? Then I don't need to. That's why I didn't address him. You, however, did not call on yourself to repent, just him, so I called you out. You say he needs to repent for ediquette and decorum's sake but you don't for name calling in anger. Yet what kind of decorum are you displaying in PM when you unload on a brother like you did?

How is telling someone THEIR attitude stinks then in anger (what did Christ say about 'anger'? what does the Bible say about exclaiming 'you fool'?) call them a name in a questionable attitude itself not doublemindedness?

You sit here as a judge of Waltern's attitude and my heart just by presenting the facts (as you have not denied them) and calling you out.

Yet somehow you've done no wrong here.

"Why not address him as you are me for posting as he did?"

I've told Waltern on prior threads that I thought some of his intentions in debate were simply argumentative and self absorbed.

I call you out because you don't hold yourself accountable for anything even now.... just everyone else.